Howard wouldn’t be seen again until the closing moments of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 in 2017.
Incorrect. He was in the stinger for Guardians 1 in 2014.
(Achievement unlocked: Nit-picking Nerd)
Movie franchises generally follow the law of diminishing returns. Christopher Reeve’s iconic first turn as Superman made $170m more than his second and a positively heroic $500m more than his fourth. Marvel's Avengers:Infinity War still shot Josh Brolin's Thanos reprises his role as villain But Marvel’s carefully …
"No mention of Deadpool?"
I loved Deadpool the characterisation and humour were fantastic, looking forward to the sequel.
I have always thought that a lot of Harry Harrisons books would make good sci-fi/ fantasy films, the Death World/Stainless Steel Rat series would translate well to the big screen.
The first titles in each "line" have been good, if a little tedious in having to re-tell the backstory. The first sequels have been weak, relying on the goodwill generated. Subsequent sequels leave me wishing for the 2 hours of my life back. Pathetic plots* and dialogue. DC movies are as bad as Marvel in those respects.
Dodgy gadget-obsessed character with a dubious background and questionable mental health mistrusts squeaky-clean morally superior character and tries to take goody-goody down. But was I talking about Fatman vs. Stuporman or Captain America: Uncharacteristic Choices War?
This post has been deleted by its author
Yeah, Cinematic Universes will keep coming for the foreseeable future, and train wrecks like Universal's cringe-worthy "Dark Universe" or DC's limping DCU won't deter new copycats from trying to get part of the party.
As for Marvel's MCU itself, I won't mind if the movies keep coming: for the most part they have found that sweet spot where they are damn entertaining while respecting the viewers. They don't try to be super brainy affairs (although they sneak a bit of social commentary here and there, like in Winter Soldier or Black Panther), and won't offend your intelligence a la Transformers either.
Is it just me then who's totally fed up with these endless bloody comic-book films? Pack it in.
Nope, it's not just you. However, there's plenty of people still enjoying them. Hence the huge wads of cash from the box office. Which is the viewing public telling Marvel to make more of this.
My question to you though is, why do you care? If the films aren't for you, don't watch them. Nobody is forcing you to. So why not let other people enjoy their popcorn movies in peace (well OK bloody loud surround sound), while you get on with your day.
Mark Kermode said a clever thing about one of the later Transformers or Pirates of the Carribean films. He said something like: It took a lot of money, but that doesn't mean it's good. That just means a lot of people paid to see it. That doesn't tell you if they enjoyed it.
The films that make huge oodles of cash, like Titanic, Gone With the Wind and some of the Marvel and Christopher Nolan stuff, all do it through repeat viewing. It's the people who went three or four times to cry at Titanic (spoiler - it sinks but takes a bloody long time about it), that really made it so stonkingly lucrative.
The fact that Marvel's box office keeps going up tells you that they're not dropping the quality. Or at least that if they are, they've found a market who like it.
I wasn't a particular fan of Iron Man (too annoying and smug for my tastes), but I've really liked every other one of the films I've seen. Even the one I was dragged to thinking it would be rubbish, Guardians of the Galaxy. Which was stupid, but with a great soundtrack, and plenty of laughs.
But if you don't like, there are plenty of alternatives out there. Cinema has even belatedly recognised the old git pound recently. So I've seen 3 films with Mum in the last 6 months, all based in WWII. Their Finest (brilliant - I was expecting a weak romcom so thanks Mum), Nolan's Dunkirk (he truly is a great director) and Darkest Hour (which I hated for the liberties it took, though Oldman was good in it).
"My question to you though is, why do you care? If the films aren't for you, don't watch them."
I care because virtually all the Hollywood money is being pumped into formulaic comic-book pap, cheap horror movies and animated kids films. Theres precious little films of any substance to watch any more, and almost nothing coming out on Blu-Ray worth watching. I used to have a cinema card and used to find something to watch weekly. Now I go to the cinema probably twice a year. At least its saving me a load money.
I just don't buy that as a reason. There have been loads of interesting and different films in the last few years. This is the most diverse, interesting and "brave" that Hollywood has been in decades. We're getting musicals again, a silent film has won an oscar, kids films are far better than they were when I was a kid (my Mum had to put up with some shite in the late 70s / early 80s).
There's a bunch of Star Wars films been made in the last few years that don't suck - unlike the ones from 15 years ago, but then Cristopher Nolan has been able to make a diverse range of interestingly different blockbusters.
Tomorrow (this being a non-special non holiday period) in my local home counties market town multiplex I can watch the Avengers film of course. On many screens. Or Rampage, a comedy/action The Rock and his pet gorilla film, which is apparently not bad. A comedy drama about the Nazi occupation of Guernsey. The Quiet Place, which is apparently a very good sci-fi horror about aliens that are listening to you. Ready Player One that was apparently pretty enteratining, also with The Rock. Peter Rabbit that got awful reviews, but everyone I know who's taken their kids to see it says was great. Every Day which is a weird sci-fi body swap teen thing. The Leisure Seeker which is about dementia and Helen Mirren's slightly ropey southern draw. Truth or Dare, a rubbishy looking teen horror. Love Simon, amazingly a teen romcom about a boy who happens to be gay. And the Greatest Showman, a musical about PT Barnum.
That's a pretty diverse list (some of it even brave) and if you can't find anything to interest you in there then you're not a proper cinema fan.
I'm not sure if I'd call this a golden age of cinema, but it's healthier and far more diverse than I can remember it.
Despite all their powers and abilities, in the end, it all comes down to a fistfight. Because, inexplicably, you can't scratch a superhero with explosives, death rays, or by smashing them into buildings at supersonic speed, but only with a bare-knuckle fist, sometimes by the token human among them.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020